Re: Browns trade Trent Richardson
My problem with the Mack pick is when you have massive needs across the entire, trading down and drafting a C with your first pick isn't getting the best value. C may be the most important position on the line but it isn't the most valuable. You can find centers late in the draft and even groom rookie FA centers.
The current Browns regime can't change the past. They can't change that the previous FO thought it was worth it to trade up for Richardson and draft Weeden. In the NFL you can't change everything in a year. I can understand the trade but I still don't think it was a smart move. The Browns have made it evident that they NEED a QB in next year's draft. The problem when you go out there with a NEED, is if your guy is gone you often times reach. You end up with a Blane Gabbart or Christian Ponder. The jury is still out on Locker but I think he was a reach as well. If you look at most of the later on QB picks, they were picked because a team liked them but they didn't have a NEED for them right away.
You win in the NFL with talent. The Browns may have beat the Vikings, but they aren't as talented of a team as they were in week 2. They "tanked" the season because their FO decided it was time to trade one of their most dangerous weapons after week 2 and made it evident that they were going to draft a QB. The ironic thing is the defense is pretty stout and if they would have made a move in trading a 2nd for Alex Smith they may have been a 9-7 football team or potentially better if there D stays stout.